Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and declarations of interest.

In the absence of both the Chair and Vice-Chair, Councillor Freeman was nominated and seconded for the Chair. Members supported the nomination and Councillor Freeman took the Chair.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Merifield, Lemon and Bagnall.

A non-pecuniary declaration of interest was made by Councillor Emanuel as Ward Councillor for Newport, including Widdington (Item 8).

To consider the minutes of the previous meeting.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 11 May 2022 were approved.

To note applications which have been submitted direct to the Planning Inspectorate.

The Development Manager presented the S62A Applications report. He confirmed that the approved Minutes of the Planning Committee held on 11 May 2022, that included a PINS item, would be forwarded to the Planning Inspectorate. He confirmed that with reference to that item there would be a request included to recheck the measurements relating to the Vacant Building credit calculations.

The report was noted.

To note the Quality of Major Applications report.

The Development Manager presented the Quality of Major Applications report.

He confirmed that Appeals had generally become more expensive and that 2021/22 had seen a catch up of Appeals from PINS. He said that the next critical date would be the end of the calendar year.

The Committee noted the report for information.

To note the notification of this application.

The Development Manager presented the notification of an application for a Development Consent Order for the Longfield Solar Farm between Boreham and Hatfield Peverel, in the Districts of Braintree and Chelmsford. The proposal exceeded 50 megawatts.

The Committee noted the notification of this application.

To consider application UTT/21/3269/DFO.

The Development Manager presented an application for approval of reserved matters relating to outline application UTT/17/3573/OP for the erection of 350 dwellings, internal roads, open space, sports pitch provision and other associated infrastructure. This matter had been deferred by the Planning Committee on 27 April 2022.

The application was recommended for approval subject to conditions as set out in section 17 of the report.

Members raised questions in respect of:

·         The football pitch.

·         Water capacity issues.

·         Community facilities and schooling provision.

·         The possibility of a Grampian condition being included. The Development Manager indicated that this condition failed the test for necessity. However, Mr Clark (Applicant) said that he would be willing to accept a Grampian condition.

Members discussed:

·         Garden sizes, particularly relating to affordable housing.

·         Concerns in respect of tandem parking. The Development Manager said that this was an emerging policy that would be picked up within the Local Plan.

·         Urban design issues in respect of future energy efficiency.

·         The Grampian condition that had been accepted in principle by the applicant with specific wording to be agreed.

Councillor Fairhurst proposed that the development be approved, in line with the recommendation and with an added Grampian condition.

Councillor Sutton seconded the proposal.

RESOLVED that the development be approved, in line with the recommendation and with an added Grampian condition.

A statement was read out from Councillor P Lees that detailed progress that had been made since Planning Committee on 27 April 2022.

Councillor G Mott (Elsenham PC Chair) spoke and highlighted that he considered that three important issues had not been resolved.

A Clark (Applicant) spoke in support.

There was a brief adjournment between 11.10 am and 11.15 am.

Please note that this item has been withdrawn.

This item had been withdrawn.

To consider application UTT/21/2649/FUL.

The Principal Planning Officer presented an application for the demolition of five existing buildings and the erection of three new buildings forming ten residential dwellings. This application had been deferred at Planning Committee on 13 April 2022. He outlined progress made since the previous committee meeting and said that the additional offer of £25,000 as an offsite contribution toward affordable housing was considered to be a fair and reasonable offer.

The application was recommended to approval subject to conditions.

Councillor Emanuel stated that she was the Ward Member for the area but that she had had no involvement previously in this application.

Members raised questions in respect of:

·         Differences from previous extant cases.

·         Independent viability assessments.

·         Sewerage issues. The Chair suggested that there be an informative on this.

·         How the buildings would look.

·         The meadowland.

Members discussed:

·         The lack of an independent viability assessment. The Development Manager said that the applicant was not claiming viability.

·         The principles around whether or not the site would be sold on.

Councillor Sutton proposed that the application be approved in line with the recommendations.

Councillor LeCount seconded the proposal.

RESOLVED to approve the development in line with the recommendations.

To consider application UTT/22/0391/OP.

The Senior Planning Officer presented an outline application with all matters reserved except for access for a residential development comprising 14 self-build dwellings together with access from and improvements to Buttleys Lane.

The application was recommended for refusal for the reasons as set out in section 17 of the report.

Members raised questions in respect of:

·         Access arrangements and passing places.

·         Water and sewerage issues.

·         The layout.

·         The possible need for a site visit.

·         The objections made by Essex CC Highways.

·         The NPPF implications.

Members discussed:

·         Access arrangements to Buttleys Lane.

·         The Listed Building implications.

Councillor Emanuel proposed that the application be refused.

Councillor Fairhurst seconded the proposal.

RESOLVED to refuse permission for the development for the reasons set out in section 17 of the report.

To consider application UTT/21/3626/FUL.

The Senior Planning Officer presented an application for the installation and operational of a standby gas generation plant and ancillary infrastructure to provide backup generation to the National Grid

The application was recommended for approval with conditions as set out in section 17 of the report.

Members raised questions in respect of:

·         The three containers that would be generating electricity from gas.

·         How much electricity could be generated.

·         The possible alternative of batteries.

·         How much noise there could be.

·         A cooling solution.

·         Smoke and pollution implications.

·         The fact that initially gas could be turned into electricity but subsequently hydrogen could replace gas.

The Senior Planning Officer provided information in respect of energy generation and noise levels. She said that 10,350,000 Kwh could be generated.

Members discussed:

·         The possible alternative of batteries as a back-up.

·         Sustainability.

·         The need to focus on planning issues.

Councillor LeCount  proposed that the application be approved as per the recommendation.

Councillor Loughlin seconded the proposal.

RESOLVED to approve the application with conditions as per the recommendation.

The meeting ended at 12.23 pm.

This document contains late submissions, updates or addendums to existing agenda items which are received up to and including the end of business on the Friday before Planning Committee. The late list is circulated after 3.00 pm and before 5.00 pm on the Monday prior to Planning Committee. This is a public document and it is published with the agenda papers on the UDC website.